Requests for comment/Tpi issues

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
The following request for comments is closed. The request was eventually archived as inactive.
Moved from RFP


Relevant links:

Thanks. Siebrand 15:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

See also, Talk:Requests for permissions#Issue at tpi.wp --Jeremyb 16:08, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I too think User:K. Kellogg-Smith is somewhat trigger happy. I got an infinite block on tpi.wiktionary for nominating the article w/index.php for speedy deletion. Or maybe it was for creating an user account. It only took two minutes from I created the account till I was blocked for vandalism. This was done by User:K. Kellogg-Smith. --Jorunn 01:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

From the archives: [1] he's got sysop until october, granted by shanel. I?m unblockign the bots and setting the flags, those are both well known bots by well known interwikiers. So this is just paperwork. Someone should really explain to him blocking nonvandalism is not to be done lightly, and if many changes bothered him, he should've requested a bot flag for those accounts drini [es:] [commons:] 02:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, extract from his tpiwiki talk:

*The Tok Pisin Wikipedia is being reconstructed/restructured to meet Wikipedia standards.  Because I am doing all the work on this project, I take the position that my sysop/administrator authority permits me (among other things) to delete any and all articles that (1) I believe are non-relevant stubs, (2) articles that are clearly not encyclopedic, and (3) anything else that in my judgement do not meet the criteria of a bona fide Wikipedia article or Wikipedia stub.  Argue and complain about it if you wish.  In my best judgement the Polish stubs you refer to met all of the criteria I have stated here.   K. Kellogg-Smith 15:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

While he maybe may be right, that's no way to get more people involved, sysops should be specially careful on small wikis to be polite and patiently guide newcomers. drini [es:] [commons:] 02:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

 Well known "bots" or not, I believe they violate the basic principles of the Foundation.  They are launched by one or more "users", they cannot be edited, commented upon, or otherwise controlled except by deleting or manually editing the lists the "bot" software unilaterally creates and inserts in articles.  I have seen the absurdity of having long "SieBot"-generated lists of language links attached to one-, two-, or three-line stub 'articles', text that that can't meet even the most basic Wikpedia requirements for classification as a Wikipedia article.
 While User:Drini has the authority as a steward to unblock my blocks and "setting the flags", it would have been much more helpful had it known where in Wikimedia the information about "bots" and requesting "a bot flag for those accounts" is located, and providing me with an interWiki link to take me there as an FYI.  But, since I had previously compiled an alphabetized list of some 610 Wikipedia: namespace articles (as of this date; there are many more out there that for the past few months I haven't had the time to list), I'll go ahead and provide the link to "Wikipedia:Bot policy" here for the edification of all of you.  But please note, there is no information in that article about Steward Drini's suggestion about requesting "a bot flag for those accounts".
 User Jorunn had several methods available to contact me if I had erred in blocking it on the TPI Wikipedia, but did not do so.  My apologies to it if I erred.
 As a final note, I had been working on the two TPI Wikis for about six weeks prior to my request for temporary sysop permission being granted on July 9th.  There were no active users, and the registered sysop had done nothing at all with the Wikis for at least a year and a half.  Speaking bluntly, there was and is no TPI community; no new articles have been inserted more than two and a half years (and no new ones to date).  Except for my work, the Tok Pisin Wikipedia is in fact defunct and inactive (except for the busy language linking bots creating language links to non-articles (User:Siebrand take note here and review the bot policy on useful interWiki linking).  In fact, the Wikipedia community (as indicated by those who have signed on to WikiProject Melanesia) is busy with writing English-language articles about Melanesia for inclusion in the English language Wikipedia, and with only one exception, have not in any way become involved with the Tok Pisin Wikipedia.  So put aside your grandiose ideas about the "Wikipedia community" everyone here talks so much about.  My target is to make the TPI Wikipedia and Wiktionary acceptable as a respectable knowledge resource to which the real Melanesian community will itself come around to discovering, using, and making contributions for its furtherance and development. I've got less than sixty days now to bring the two TPI Wikis up to an acceptable standard and at a level that will appeal to educated Melanesians and expatriate nationals working in the region.  That, my friends, is where I belive the true Tok Pisin Wikipedia community is going to be coming from.
Regards, K. Kellogg-Smith 04:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC) (TPI sysop/administrator)
Englis wikipedia Bot policy bears no weigh upon other wikis, so there's no reason why THAT page should point you here. But people are complaining that you block first, ask later, while you should do it otherway. If too many recent changes were bothering, you hsould've asked for feedback, that's your job as a small wiki sysop, moreover, there's a link at top of this page about botflagging. drini [es:] [commons:] 15:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Also, it's hard to get more people to write articles, when you delete their contributions (which may be really minor, but they were about a geographical location, which is an encyclopedic topic), articles dn't get created in final form, they start small and will increase over time, that's the wiki way. drini [es:] [commons:] 15:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Further to this, I notice that K. Kellogg-Smith has infinitely blocked the IP address (block log) giving the reason "Inserting nonsense/gibberish into pages", when contributions from this IP address consist solely of minor edits to userspace pages and subpages of User:Aliasd, the owner of the static IP address.

    In my opinion this demonstrates yet again that K. Kellogg-Smith is abusing his temporary sysop powers (infinitely blocking bots and other users for little or no reason, deleting geographic stubs, and being sufficiently hostile to other users that the active user base of each project now consists only of himself).

    I request that the block on the IP address be lifted. Wantok 08:55, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
A bit more information on the IP block:
  • The IP was used to edit my user account once when I forgot to log on.
  • The IP was only editing in userspace. Only on one account.
  • The IP was blocked for producing nonsense, which it clearly was not.
  • The IP is a static IP which is not used publicly.
There is NO REASON why there should be a block on this IP. Rationale was not clearly defined and a request for explanation has not been answered. Aliasd 09:25, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Update: K._Kellogg-Smith's reply to the block here Aliasd 18:14, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Pardon me, but I am flabbergasted by the way K._Kellogg-Smith has literally taken ownership of tpi.wp. I have few words for it. Cheers! Siebrand 18:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Quote from K. Kellogg-Smiths answer to Aliasd: You didn't log on under your user name, so to me you were just another anonymous contributor (WikiMedia rules state that unregistered users may edit, but not contribute articles to Wikipedia.)
This is only a complete misunderstanding, I hope. --Jorunn 22:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Although your contributions were stubs in need of being developed further into full fleged Tok Pisin articles, they were nonetheless very worthwhile contributions, and very much appreciated. I was pleased to see them, but unable to talk to you about them. So I figured if I blocked your IP you'd do as you just did — contact me about being blocked, and we could go on from there. -- And that was...? Aliasd 07:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Tsk tsk, AliasD. Quoting out of context. For shame. Why didn't you quote my entire message to you? And also with the text of the Wikipedia e-mail I sent you to illustrate the alternate method of intercommunication made available by the Wikipedia Foundation, eh?
As for abusing my sysop/administrator privileges, or "taking over" the two TPI Wikis, I have this to say:
Facts are facts.  Neither AliasD nor Matt Andrews ("Wantok"), who have complained above, and both of whom claim near native fluency in Tok Pisin, and who, like me, are members of the WikiProject Melanesia, had before now made any attempts whatsoever to keep the Tok Pisin Wikipedia alive during (and before) the year and a half that it was dormant and neglected.  Spam and vandalism piled up, but neither of the two posted "speedy delete" notices to any of the obvious spam/vandalism that had occurred and was still occurring.  Although both lived and worked in the nation of Papua New Guinea, and had daily, intimate knowledge of the language and regular contact with others who were/are fluent in the TP creole language, neither bothered to take the time and effort to write and contribute Tok Pisin articles (not even simple stubs, mind you) to the dormant, nearly dead and dying, Tok Pisin Wikipedia.  Go figure.  Fluent in the neo-Melanesian ("tok pisin") creole language, but not willing to contribute to the Tok Pisin Wikipedia.  But more than willing to contribute to Melanesian articles in the English language Wikipedia.  Not until I came along and started making waves, that is.  Now their heads and hackles come up.  User:Wantok began by copying English language Wikipedia articles into the TPI Wikipedia: namespace, articles on "Requesting administrator permissions".  And now User:AliasD and User:Wantok have begun anonymously entering edits and articles into the TPI Wikipedia.  As I told User:AliasD, I have no objection whatsoever to anyone entering articles in good faith into the TPI Wikipedia and Wiktionary, but I do object to those entries being done anonymously, without any means of knowing who the author is, or how the author can be contacted.  And since both complainants know me, know how to contact me directly on the WikiProject Melanisia portal, and know how to contact me on my EN Wikipedia Talk page, and in addition have never added anything (with the one-time exception of User:Wantok) to my regular WikiProject Melanesia progress reports reflecting their dislike of what I'm doing with the two TPI Wikis.   So I find it quite disingenuous of the two to express their complaints here that their anonymous IP's were blocked when they knew all the time that they could contact me directly at any time on several different venues.  And so, User:AliasD, to answer your question, that's "what is ..."
As a software developer, web designer and maintainer, published writer, a long time documentation specialist in writing corporate policies and procedures, user manuals, copy editing technical/academic papers, and a man who has lived in and traveled extensively in the Pacific and Pacific Rim countries (not to mention the rest of the world), one who speaks several languages and understands a great many more, I have often been, and tolerated, critical analysis of my work.  I took on the task of helping to clean up the Tok Pisin Wikipedia purely as an offshoot of my knowledge of the Hawaiian language and its creole, Hawaiian pidgen English, and having a classmate who is deeply involved in the re-writing of the Hawaiian-language Bible in contemporary ("linguistic") Hawaiian.  To me, reviving a dormant Wikipedia for an absolutely unique pidgin English creole and turning it into an information resource useful and accepted by everyone and anyone in Melanesia, Oceania, and the Pacific Rim countries, indiginous native peoples and non-indiginous expatriates, academic and non-academic alike, for use as a language and information resource in a region where cannibalism is still a very recent memory, is not an ego-enhancer, but a "labor of love" on which I have spent countless hours working on and developing during the past two months.  My knowledge of Melanesian pidgin English goes way back, but my ability to read and write has developed quite rapidly during the past month.  It is my knowledge and understanding of the history and development of neo-Melanesian ("Tok Pisin"), and its use in contemporary Melanesian society, which is helping me to make distinctive changes to the format of both the Tok Pisin Wikipedia and the Tok Pisin Wiktionary, along with my understanding and use of a number of European and Oceanic languages that have figured in the development of PNG's pidgin English language.
At the outset of my work I proposed to the WikiProject Melanesia group that an ad hoc board of editors be formed to define policies for the Tok Pisin Wikipedia.  That ad hoc group, consisting of members of WikiProject Melanesia group augmented by any outside professionals who might be interested, was never formed.  Why?  Because none of the group's members, other than User:Wantok and his supporter, User:AliasD (both of them among my "accusers" above) responded to my proposal.  During the past two months I have extensively documented my ideas about the direction the Tok Pisin Wikipedia could/should take, and the work I have been doing to implement those ideas.  Matt Andrews (User:Wantok) was the only WikiProject Melanesia member who took the time to comment on my ideas.  He offered some very good ideas, but was opposed to my idea of having the Tok Pisin Wikipedia multilingual (Tok Pisin - English) to reflect the contemporary usage and intermixing of the two languages, preferring instead to keep TPI Wikipedia Main namespace articles and other namespace fucntions written exclusively in Tok Pisin, no English allowed.  Although I had openly supported Matt in his unsuccessful request to be granted Adminship in the EN Wikipedia, and again openly supported him in his also unsuccessful request to be granted temporary sysop/adminstrator permissions, supporting him in the belief that we could cooperate in getting the TPI Wikipedia back on its feet again, Matt's belief in the requirement that the TPI Wikipedia be exclusively a Tok Pisin Wiki directly conflicts with my belief that the TPI Wikipedia of necessity (given the minimal, almost non-existent, access to computers and Internet by the majority of Tok Pisin speakers) should be a learning resource for the people living and working in Melanesia by making available to them a multi-lingual Wikipedia through which they could learn more about the country they live and work in, and a resource to which they themselves can contribute.  That goal requires first and formost that the TPI Wikipedia be honest and presentable, and not a compendium of meaningless one-, two-, three-, and four-line "stubs", title placeholders, and "contest" entries by individuals seeking to get their home town in as many Wikipedias as possible, the condition in which the TPI Wikipedia is now, but is gradually being changed.
You can say what you want, and complain all you want, about the way I'm going about reorganizing the two Wikis, but that reorganization is based on experience doing that kind of work elsewhere, and the need to get it done as quickly as possible, bypassing Wikipedia conventions whenever necessary.  My way is a way that icon Jim Wales understands, and which is documented in the Foundation's "Ignore All Rules" (IAR) principle to be used whenever the rules stand in the way of getting a job done.  And I have only until October 9th to do that.  And I don't mind stepping on toes until October 9th if that's what it takes.  I certainly, and I hope clearly, don't consider my being a sysop for a defunct and near-dead Wikipedia means being nothing more than a sort of schoolyard "hall monitor".  It does mean that to me, but also a whole lot more than that in this case.  You can depose me if you wish, but in the end it will be the peoples of Melanesia that will suffer, not me.
K. Kellogg-Smith 18:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC) (TPI sysop/administrator)
Really, this can't go on until October 9th. K. Kellogg-Smiths attitude and actions are not in accordance with how a Wikipedia or Wiktionary administrator should act. --Jorunn 08:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

For the record, I was an active contributor at tpiwiki before you came along. 14:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC) edit: Forgot to login Aliasd 14:57, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • For User:Aliasd, as far as I can tell for sure, you are certainly very correct about being an active contributor to the TPI Wikipedia before I came along.  But by no more than 22 days before I did.  And I suspect probably less than that, since my TPI "Contributions" list has maxed out at 500 entries.  Your contributions record (23 entries to date) also shows that in the time interval between when you came on board and when I (nominally) came on board, you made only 5 contributions, all five of them on the same day.  Of the five, only one was about Papua New Guinea, a one-line/13 word "stub" accompanying an aerial photo of Tabubil.  The remaining three contriubtions were work you did on the TPI-4 language template.  I must complement you on your interest in the TPI Wikipedia, but please don't start patting yourself on the back just quite yet.  In the time interval between when you made your sixth contribution and I when Icame on board, I had already made 14 significant contributions to the TPI Wiki.  I have no doubt at all that with your background and knowledge of PNG you will in time become a worthwhile contributor to the two Wikis.  For a start, though, you might think about expanding your "Tabubil" stub by using the EN Wikipedia "Tabubil" article that you requested be copy edited, an article which I in fact did copy edit, and with which I am now quite familiar.   K. Kellogg-Smith 16:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC) (TPI sysop/administrator)

This IP block has not been lifted yet Aliasd 15:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Please read Wikimedia policy here on allowing anonymous users to create and edit pages, then discuss the issue with me on my TPI discussion page.  K. Kellogg-Smith 16:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC) (TPI sysop/administrator)

  • Well, really!
  • Click here and read my TPI Wiki progress reports.  If you think you (or anyone else for that matter) can do better than what I've done, then Jorunn, by all means you have a go at it!!  Don't let me stand in your way.  As for my attitudes and actions, put your money where your mouth is and cite Wikipedia and Wikimedia rules, regulations, and articles to justify and back up your opinions about why "this can't go on", and to back up your opinion on how "a Wikipedia or Wiktionary administrator should act."
  • FYI, when I came upon the scene the TPI Wikipedia and Wiktionary were covered with the cobwebs and dust of 18 months of inactivity, and marred by the graffiti of vandalism and spam.  The TPI Wikipedia had in it no more than six developed Wikipedia articles, accompanied by more than 300 one-line, two-line, and three-line stub entries.  The TPI Wikitionary had only two entries in it.  And during my watch, there has been only one, repeat one, new entry ("Unserdeutsch") that I encouraged a DE user to write and contribute.  Also, if you have the courage to do so, take a look at the TPI article "German New Guinea" (I copied it over from the EN Wikipedia) and click on the "switch" from the English version to the Tok Pisin version.  Like it or not, creating that kind of bilingual TPI Wikipedia is just one example of what I'm trying to accomplish with the Wikis.
  • I agree that this has gone on long enough.  But as our beloved President Harry S. Truman said about the criticism he continually received during his presidency, "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen!".  Well, I can take the heat, and I'm staying.
  • Cheers, K. Kellogg-Smith 19:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC) (TPI sysop/administrator)

Arbitrary section break[edit]

I really do not feel as if this has addressed the IP block issue. I feel K. Kellogg-Smith has simply taken a defensive angle due to an unfarmiliarity with Wikipedia Policy and procedure, and a percieved hostility in the resulting community backlash. This being said, the users he is involved with disputes with are some of the easiest around to resolve disputes with, and I personally feel we can find better administrators for this project within our community. Aliasd 15:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

The contents of the email in question: (in full)

From: K. Kellogg-Smith
To: Aliasd
Subject: Wikipedia e-mail re my blocking your IP
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 16:59:45 GMT (Sun, 02:59 EST)

I decided to use Wikipedia e-mail as an example relevant to my response to your query on my TPI user talk page about your IP being blocked.

Best regards, K. Kellogg-Smith (TPI sysop-administrator)

I am normally pretty sharp, but I didn't get it... Aliasd 16:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

If there's a community, let it decide what to do. Open a request for comments to decide upon blocks, and open a request for adminship vote to decide who is going to be a sysop. Once community decides, we remove the temporary and put the voted ones (although if community is quite small, appointment may be temporary again). drini [es:] [commons:] 18:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Whatever active TPI community exists, it is very definitely not only quite small, but very small indeed.  Despite having more than 150 registered users, the active TPI community in fact consists only of my four "accusers"; Matt Andrews ("Wantok"), Aliasd, and several "bot" owners with no interest at all in the TPI Wikipedia itself.  Therefore I propose as a reasonable alternative that a group of Wikipedia administrators take the issues raised here under consideration, and decide among themselves the best course of action to take rather than putting the issues to a vote by a "kangaroo court" of a few disgruntled users. K. Kellogg-Smith 13:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC) (TPI sysop/administrator)

Several questions[edit]

K. Kellogg-Smith, sorry I don't understand you. Basically, you write too many letters:) Could you clarify your position by giving short (no more than 2-3 sentences) and clear (without mentioning long-dead US presidents and so on) answers to my questions:

  1. You blocked two interwiki bots. Your email to botop indicate that you're unfamiliar with practices of using bots on Wikimedia projects, especiallly practices of using interwiki bots. Do you promise to look how things work on other wikis before using your sysop powers toward bots again?
  2. You blocked Jorunn on tpi.wiktionary for nominating a crap page for deletion with summary "Vandalism". Immediately after that you deleted that page, and thus fulfilled his "vandalistic" request. What were your reasons for blocking?
  3. You have indefinitely blocked several IPs for vandalism. Did you know that only proxies are generally indef-blocked on Wikimedia projects?
  4. Why did you block that IP?
  5. Was it worth an indef block without attempting to communicate with this user first?

Thanks. MaxSem 20:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

    1. Au contraire, I am thoroughly familiar with the use of spiders and automatic search/replace software products.  Not only have I looked at the use of interWiki bots on many other Wikipedias, but have used them extensively both for practical reasons as well as for evaluating them with regard to the way they affect the TPI Wikipedia.  Thus my decision to temporarily block them.  Please note that I said "temporarily" (for a short period of time), not "indefinitely".
    2. An unusual "delete" box attached to a new "w/w/w/php" page, with an empty user page for equally new User:Jorunn.  If I erred, then I erred on the side of safety.
    3. Give me the article containing the rule you're invoking and I'll respond to your question.
    4. Give me a reason why I should not have done so and I'll respond to your question.
    5. Please first read Anonymous user then ask me your question again.
  • My responses are indeed long, but necessary when having to respond to those few users whose reactions are based on negative attitudes and their assumptions about what Wikipedia policy should or should not be, and who then go on to challenge my work.  I have had at my hand ever since the day I was granted sysop permission the Wikimedia "System Administrator's Handbook".  Cite me an article in the Handbook that I've intentionally (or even inadvertantly) violated, and I'll humbly apologize for my error.  I have also catalogued and alphabetized over 600 EN Wikipedia: namespace articles.  Cite any one of those articles where I've erred, and again I'll humbly apologize.
  • And oh yeah, our President Harry Truman was a great and humble man who agonized over the decision whether or not to use the atomic bomb to put end Japan's decades-long wars of agression in Asia and the Pacific.  A terrible decision for a man to have to make, but he had the strength of character to do what he thought necessary, and to accept responsibility for the consequences.
K. Kellogg-Smith 12:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC) (TPI sysop/administrator)

From your responses, I understand that your philosophy is block first, ask later (blocked temporarily the interwiki bots, blocked jorunn for tagging the w/index.php, blocked the IP reverting you and readding the interwiki links... that's what we call "trigger-happy", is that your philosophy regarding sysop? Now:

  1. Interwiki bots are GOOD, they help people in two ways, they let outside people knowing tok-pisin to know there's a wikipedia on that language (when they run across an article on other wiki linking tpi) and thus get them involved. And also help tpi readers to locate same article on other wikipedias where they can get more information or different expositions. So interwiki bots are considered a good thing across wikimedia (again, english wikipedia is a pathological example)
  2. So you blocked first to be on safe side, even though there was no emergency. (If Jorunn were a vandal, he would either continued and making it obvious he was a vandal, or moving on, in which case block was unnecesary).
  3. It's not codified in an article, but that's the philosphy across projects. Sometimes ips are shared, and if you block an IP used today by a vandal, you're preventing some legit user from editing there in the future. That's the reason only open proxies are indefinitely blocked. So don't block forever ips for one-day vandalism. (so now you can respond to that question, and "it wasn't written nowhere" excuse only tells you're not familiar enough with wikimedia practices to being a sysop)
  4. An IP readded interwiki bots. Good thing. Legit edit. So you shouldn't have blocked it. Again, you being a sysop doesn't give you the veto power on the wiki (which I think you don't understand), so you can't forbid or ban interwiki links, even though you dislike them. That's why you shouldn't have blocked that ip. (so you can now also answer this question).
  5. Anonymous user gives NO argument for blocking that IP. I quote:
On Wikimedia wikis, anonymous users were originally only at a minor disadvantage to registered users, but as time has gone on several features have become unavailable to anonymous editors. Anonymous editors cannot move pages, upload media, or maintain a watchlist. On the English and Farsi Wikipedias, they cannot create pages outside of the "talk" namespace. Because IP addresses are so often dynamic, an IP-based user page is generally impractical, and in fact disallowed on several wikis. Anonymous users are often prohibited from participation in processes such as deletion and permissions debates, or may only participate on a restricted basis (e.g. may leave comments, but may not vote).
They also are not able to select the option of minor edit as this could allow a bad-natured user to make undesirable changes and not be spotted for some time.

So, IP edits an aliasd page. They're moving a page? No. They're uploading media? NO. They're creating a new page outside talk namespace? YES, but as the page you pointed points, only in the ENGLISH and FARSI wikipedia they can't create articles (on the other hundred wikipedias they can). IP userpages are discouraged (as in "this is my userpage"), but talk pages for ips are often used (specially since many people have static ips). There was no debate ging on, so, I don't see why the IP was to be blocked, care to elaborate again? drini [es:] [commons:] 13:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

(And the point about your president Truman, is not that he was bad, but that unnecesariy rethorical responses only difficult communication, so let's get to the directly to the point and keep on the subject being discussed). drini [es:] [commons:] 13:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

more questions[edit]

  1. Why is thus vandalism? You blocked the IP for 3 months, and all the IP was to add images to an article! drini [es:] [commons:] 13:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)